xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: xfsdump, the journal, and incremental dumps of subtrees...

To: Neil Harkins <nharkins@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: xfsdump, the journal, and incremental dumps of subtrees...
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 13:37:22 +1100
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10511041642290.16852-100000@xxxxxxxx>; from nharkins@xxxxxxxx on Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:04:15PM -0800
References: <Pine.SOL.4.10.10511041642290.16852-100000@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:04:15PM -0800, Neil Harkins wrote:
> 
> Hi. New to list, and didn't find an answer in the FAQ, or 
> a quick search of the archive, sorry if this resurrects a horse:
> 
> Does xfsdump -l use the journal to determine what's changed
> for an incremental dump? 

No, the journal doesnt hold the sort of information
needed to make decisions related to incremental dumps
(its a circular log, not what you're thinking).

> Background: I'm currently using rsync to perform incremental updates
> of a subtree with a significant number of files, when only about 5%
> changes, and the filesystem walk to check each file's timestamp 
> is totally unnecessary if the journal can be consulted. 

It cannot.

> If xfsdump uses the journal to avoid the walk, then using 
> xfsdump | xfsrestore would be ideal, except according to 
> the man page, it doesn't allow incrementals of subtrees. :(
> Could someone explain why that is the case?  

Not sure about that one off the top of my head.

cheers.

-- 
Nathan


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>